Even if its an evolution, Im wondering how much the ban on the DDRS is going to, god willing, hurt the RB9's qualy pace.

My guess is not much. They were able to cope with EBD ban, which had far more severe design implications. DDRS is a small detail compared to that and it wasn't even incorporated in the original design (or do I remember incorrectly?).

My guess is not much. They were able to cope with EBD ban, which had far more severe design implications. DDRS is a small detail compared to that and it wasn't even incorporated in the original design (or do I remember incorrectly?).

DDRS was only incorporated into RB8s in Singapore. But it coincided with Vettel's run of 4 straight wins.

Yes i did mean qualy. Didnt really think it needed explanation, but anyway...

2012 regs had unlimited DRS use outside of the race. As such Red Bull built their cars around qualifying that could survive a race so long as they were 1+ seconds ahead in first. Anything less than that theyve suffered.

2013 they can only use DRS in the designated zones, which is intended to be 2 zones at most tracks. That will likely mean the car will need to have more genuine top speed to be competitive as they wont be able to build a high downforce draggy car with DRS as a top speed bandaid to get it on the front row.

Yes i did mean qualy. Didnt really think it needed explanation, but anyway...

2012 regs had unlimited DRS use outside of the race. As such Red Bull built their cars around qualifying that could survive a race so long as they were 1+ seconds ahead in first. Anything less than that theyve suffered.

2013 they can only use DRS in the designated zones, which is intended to be 2 zones at most tracks. That will likely mean the car will need to have more genuine top speed to be competitive as they wont be able to build a high downforce draggy car with DRS as a top speed bandaid to get it on the front row.

You are getting this all wrong. Its the fact that they are the car with the most downforce that allows them to qualify better than others, and usually have better race pace too. Downforce is everything in the current F1. And everyone had access to DRS during qualy, and its arguable red bull, with their gearing not optimized for it, like I wrote above, might not even be the ones that benefited more from DRS anyway.

You are getting this all wrong. Its the fact that they are the car with the most downforce that allows them to qualify better than others, and usually have better race pace too. Downforce is everything in the current F1. And everyone had access to DRS during qualy, and its arguable red bull, with their gearing not optimized for it, like I wrote above, might not even be the ones that benefited more from DRS anyway.

Red Bull were getting a quali advantage by using DRS in the twisty bits, where other cars couldn't use it.

They have now been prevented from using it in those areas, so they will suffer a disadvantage from this rule change.

Red Bull were getting a quali advantage by using DRS in the twisty bits, where other cars couldn't use it.

They have now been prevented from using it in those areas, so they will suffer a disadvantage from this rule change.

I know that, what I am saying is I dont think they will be disadvantaged at all, because they used to choose gear ratios for the races, and not optimize it for constant drs during qualy (or even the drs zones at all). They were hitting the rev limiter. Race pace will be closer to qualy pace, and red bull are always amongst the strongest race pace cars...

I know that, what I am saying is I dont think they will be disadvantaged at all, because they used to choose gear ratios for the races, and not optimize it for constant drs during qualy (or even the drs zones at all). They were hitting the rev limiter. Race pace will be closer to qualy pace, and red bull are always amongst the strongest race pace cars...

When Red Bull are using DRS in the twisty bits, gearing is irrelevant because those are not the fastest parts of the track. They had an advantage, they will lose it, that is what is meant by being 'disadvantaged'.

The only thing we know is that this partial ban will have a considerable impact on the specific setups of the cars. Off-hand I would tend to say that the relative performance impact will be negative for RBR, especially considering they actually got their unique DDRS working pretty well. If we consider how narrow the field was every bit mattered a lot.

Maybe we will see a bit more racey RB setup. In any case aerodynamic efficiency will be key and not having a guy like Lewis in the successor of the fastest car at the end of the 2012 season might be one of the biggest relative performance gains of the RBR package.

When Red Bull are using DRS in the twisty bits, gearing is irrelevant because those are not the fastest parts of the track. They had an advantage, they will lose it, that is what is meant by being 'disadvantaged'.

Sigh..

I think his point was that they were not gaining as much in straights with open DRS as others, so they are not losing that much/at all with the new DRS rules. though if they'll introduce 2 DRS zones every race, those will most probably be in straights where they were hitting the limiter... then I think we will see a new setup philosophy from them.

I think his point was that they were not gaining as much in straights with open DRS as others, so they are not losing that much/at all with the new DRS rules. though if they'll introduce 2 DRS zones every race, those will most probably be in straights where they were hitting the limiter... then I think we will see a new setup philosophy from them.

Red Bull are losing with the new DRS fules, because the places they were gaining were not the straights, but certain corners where they alone could open the DRS. That is the advantage they will be losing, gearing and top speed is another issue entirely.

I think that Red Bull will be forced to change their approach if they can no longer be reasonably sure of pole, and might therefore expect to have to do some overtaking. They will have to use higher gearing, as they did in Abu Dhabi for Vettel, and maybe remove a little downforce. That revised car was still pretty quick, but they are obviously quite certain that they get an advantage in race pace from the lower gearing, otherwise they wouldn't persist with it.

Some people will say "OK, but Vettel has proved he can overtake, so where's the problem?" The problem is that a low-geared car really struggles to overtake other cars which have similar pace and are on similar tyres, because it can't fully utilise the DRS That is the situation Vettel will most often be in if he can't put it on pole. Being able to overtake slower cars, or cars which are on much older or harder tyres, is not going to be relevant most of the time.

oh no, I'm fed up with half open garage with a car peeking inside it. no more plz

They have a very nice video on the RB story at youtube.com/redbullracing to gap the time. (I like Neweys: "The level of sniping at us after 2010 got silly.")

It is also interesting that there is hardly any talk about the RB9, nor about engineers moving somewhere etc. That gives me the good feeling that they are not distracted. I don't really expect any surprises for the RB9 launch though. What I expect is that there will be some major differences between the car at the first test, the first race and the 5th race - especially since they did not have that much time to develop the 2013 challenger due to the intense WDC battle last year.

about vanity panel: we heard previously that red bull could (would) go with the letterbox step nose this year as well, after seeing the C32, could we see the RB9 with a similar solution? remember, RB8 already had those sidewalls on the edge of the nose:they just have to make them as long as the nose with the vanity panel, and not stop at the pirelli logo. would be an aesthetically good solution, and still having the function of the letterbox, whatever it is.

Posted about this on the launch thread but seems appropriate here. The back end of that is extremely small, very little there and it makes me wonder if it was influenced by the FW33 and they've shrank/moved/altered the gearbox to get that area so small?